An editorial in her top home state newspaper is pretty tough:

Harman was within bounds to argue that the AIPAC prosecution was unfair. But if she actually agreed to contact senior officials to influence an ongoing criminal case, that's a touchier subject -- and it's totally unacceptable if she agreed as part of a quid pro quo to win a job. Even though she never became chairwoman, and there's no evidence she influenced anyone, the conversation, if it occurred, is very disturbing.

The paper does not, however, call for a resignation or even an ethics investigation--just the release of the wiretap transcripts, which Harman says she welcomes.

--Michael Crowley